Rivka
Shohin
Thank you DSD! This is the kind of nuanced technical stuff I really enjoy learning. Book bought.
Confessions of Urban Yamadori Azalea Addict
- Thread starter Rivka
- Start date
Forsoothe!
Imperial Masterpiece
I think we have the makin's of a real argument here! The principle involved here is that you want the trunk bark to be undamaged and grow over the wound, eventually. First, the bark on the trunk is a different live piece of tree than the bark on the branch sticking out of it. In order to allow the trunk bark to smoothly pass over the wound, its leading edge needs to be undamaged, that is the collar that on some trees gets rumpled looking as the tree grows because it is alive and growing even though the branch is in the way. If a stub is left sticking out a few inches, then the collar can't grow over the stub until the tree has increased its diameter by two times the length of the stub sticking out (half the diameter on each side of the tree). that leaves a vector for pests & disease to enter for that long length of time. So, bad to leave a stub when pruning unless of course you return promptly at some future date not too distant. All dead wood shrinks, and that includes the length as well as the diameter. If you can slice off the branch at the top of the trunk bark without damaging the trunk bark's leading edge which is bumping up against the base of the branch, then when the branch shrinks with drying out it will be just slightly below the live, undamaged, growing bark of the trunk and eventually close flush over the old branch and just a dot will be left as a witness mark years later. Some trees like Spruce, pine and Fir shrink a great deal, as any carpenter will tell you as that's what SPF 2 x 4's are. You can sometimes see a SPF that has a hole with a nice, neat, undamaged edge and think to yourself, "How did they cut that branch of below the surface of the trunk without damaging the trunk?"
That happens when a larger branch is cut off or breaks off very low without damaging the trunk bark, which is I suppose why SPF bonsai growers leave a stub for a year or three so when they cut off the stub it is dry and has shrunk as much as it will and is at the right length to be flush with the surface of the trunk bark. Most trees have higher density wood and do not shrink as much as SPF, so that waiting period to flush cut the branch is not necessary. Of course, if the bark is very thin like JM & Az et al you need to be extra careful. The knob cutting tools are ideal to center over the base of the branch, resting on the bark of the trunk, but not cutting the trunk bark, and snipping off the branch. The branch shrinks a little and the undamaged trunk bark grows smoothly over the wound and everybody lives happily ever after. That's the way it is Dorothy!
I thought that the knob cutters were made for that purpose, but others may argue with me on that. Maybe they are just wood-workers/wood carvers tools. Incidentally, some here recently talked about having a bark removing tool and I discovered that I had such a tool, a big one, 12". I've had it forever. It came in a box of incidental tools from an auction many years ago, eons before bonsai & me, and someone told me it was a brake tool. I never used it but couldn't bring myself to actually throw it away. I kept it with my bonsai tools because it looks like a flush cutter, but without the angled head. You can imagine my sheer joy that the brake shop used these kinds of ~bonsai~ tools back in the olden days (this car dealer was an old timer). The knob, flush, and bark cutters may be, just maybe, not really invented for bonsai after all.
Think about that! I used my bark remover today for the first 8 times!
That happens when a larger branch is cut off or breaks off very low without damaging the trunk bark, which is I suppose why SPF bonsai growers leave a stub for a year or three so when they cut off the stub it is dry and has shrunk as much as it will and is at the right length to be flush with the surface of the trunk bark. Most trees have higher density wood and do not shrink as much as SPF, so that waiting period to flush cut the branch is not necessary. Of course, if the bark is very thin like JM & Az et al you need to be extra careful. The knob cutting tools are ideal to center over the base of the branch, resting on the bark of the trunk, but not cutting the trunk bark, and snipping off the branch. The branch shrinks a little and the undamaged trunk bark grows smoothly over the wound and everybody lives happily ever after. That's the way it is Dorothy!
I thought that the knob cutters were made for that purpose, but others may argue with me on that. Maybe they are just wood-workers/wood carvers tools. Incidentally, some here recently talked about having a bark removing tool and I discovered that I had such a tool, a big one, 12". I've had it forever. It came in a box of incidental tools from an auction many years ago, eons before bonsai & me, and someone told me it was a brake tool. I never used it but couldn't bring myself to actually throw it away. I kept it with my bonsai tools because it looks like a flush cutter, but without the angled head. You can imagine my sheer joy that the brake shop used these kinds of ~bonsai~ tools back in the olden days (this car dealer was an old timer). The knob, flush, and bark cutters may be, just maybe, not really invented for bonsai after all.
Think about that! I used my bark remover today for the first 8 times!
shinmai
Chumono
Rivka,
I use Masakuni convex cutters, because they cut flush to the branch and make callusing and wound abatement happen much faster.
I would be cautious/judicious in the removal of old soil, especially with rescued azaleas. The loss of too many fine roots to a high-pressure hose can be very consequential for the recovering tree. I have had considerable success filling a five gallon bucket with water and swishing the root mass gently back and forth to remove excess organic material.
I use Masakuni convex cutters, because they cut flush to the branch and make callusing and wound abatement happen much faster.
I would be cautious/judicious in the removal of old soil, especially with rescued azaleas. The loss of too many fine roots to a high-pressure hose can be very consequential for the recovering tree. I have had considerable success filling a five gallon bucket with water and swishing the root mass gently back and forth to remove excess organic material.
Rivka
Shohin
Yeah the processing of old urban yamadori has been a learning experience for sure, some amazing successes and some shocking failures.
One thing i have noticed is that smaller chunks with less branches seem to do better, even with little to no roots. Where as big chunks can just stall out, even with tons of roots.
i have been pondering if whatever energy or hormone they have go back-bud, prefers to be concentrated in one or two branches rather than spread out? That is a totally lamen guess, with no real info behind it.
Just that oddly regaurdless of age (even chunks from similar levels of the same plant) and with nearly zero care of how many roots it has (as long as it has one of two live ones) the smaller chunks grow faster and heartier than the large ones. A 1”diameter 2”long bare chunk torn haphazardly off the rest of the root often ended up with 3 times the leaves and new branches 4 months later than the rootmass it was torn from that was 10x bigger above and below the soil! Same going for midsize chunks, they had midsized growth. Who knows, its crazy, i dont know enough.
What i do know is, from 3 midsized landscaping plants i pulled out last spring, i have 19 azaleas, most shohin size with thick thick bases, Most growing like gangbusters on tiles. In shared Anderson flats. I am about to repot a handful tomorrow and see how they are doing. Their leaf mass is massive and thriving.
my only complete loss was the biggest rootball i had, with the best roots, seemingly the best chance of survival. Not a day of growth ever happened on it.
One thing i have noticed is that smaller chunks with less branches seem to do better, even with little to no roots. Where as big chunks can just stall out, even with tons of roots.
i have been pondering if whatever energy or hormone they have go back-bud, prefers to be concentrated in one or two branches rather than spread out? That is a totally lamen guess, with no real info behind it.
Just that oddly regaurdless of age (even chunks from similar levels of the same plant) and with nearly zero care of how many roots it has (as long as it has one of two live ones) the smaller chunks grow faster and heartier than the large ones. A 1”diameter 2”long bare chunk torn haphazardly off the rest of the root often ended up with 3 times the leaves and new branches 4 months later than the rootmass it was torn from that was 10x bigger above and below the soil! Same going for midsize chunks, they had midsized growth. Who knows, its crazy, i dont know enough.
What i do know is, from 3 midsized landscaping plants i pulled out last spring, i have 19 azaleas, most shohin size with thick thick bases, Most growing like gangbusters on tiles. In shared Anderson flats. I am about to repot a handful tomorrow and see how they are doing. Their leaf mass is massive and thriving.
my only complete loss was the biggest rootball i had, with the best roots, seemingly the best chance of survival. Not a day of growth ever happened on it.
leatherback
The Treedeemer
Coool!
I cannot believe I missed this thread before!
I cannot believe I missed this thread before!
Glaucus
Chumono
This is interesting. But I don't quite understand the pattern you are observing. With 'smaller chunks', do you mean individual (pieces of) plants? Or pruned back branches/trunks?
It is said that azaleas store their sugars in their stems, not their roots. So this is why a plant with few roots can bud back vigorously.
So I think you mean that some fragments created by getting the main plant out of the ground, produced more backbuds per area than the actual plants themselves?
Likewise, I have observed that when chopped, azaleas often don't backbud uniformly. They bud back many times on one pruned back branch. And then not at all on another one. When ideally you wanted a few of them on both.
I think quite long term, you should aim to remove all the branches flush from the main trunk. It is absolutely the right decision to have pruned these as 1 inch long stubs for now.
Maybe each year, one can be cut off with a cut flush to the trunk line.
